BwareDWare94
-
Content Count
11,009 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
44
Posts posted by BwareDWare94
-
-
Warriors were gifted Game 1 by JR Smith.
False. The game never should have been close enough for that play to matter. Without 6-10 gifted free throws to the Warriors the game is over
-
WeaponX20 coming into this thread with irrational LeBron hate, unable to even acknowledge how badly the Cavs were screwed on Thursday night.
Just accept that the Warriors were gifted game 1. Now they'll probably win in 5 games. We CANNOT have officiating deciding games in the NBA Finals. Ken Mauer, Ed Malloy, and Tony Brothers should not get to officiate another Finals game, period. It was a fucking joke. If you don't believe me, go back and watch the supposed "fouls" on all of Durant's FTs in the second half.
-
I mean they weren't even necessarily close calls, they were wrong calls. Kevin Durant shot at least 6 FTs in the 4th quarter on plays with no contact where the officials simply reacted to what happens without first seeing contact. It's one thing if LeBron is getting those calls too but he wasn't...and he was delivering the best single game Finals performance we've seen in 25 years, whereas Durant was hardly noticeable aside from those atrocious calls that gifted the Warriors 6-10 points.
-
1
-
-
The league has some explaining to do. The officiating over the last 15 minutes has been absolutely unacceptable.
This cannot happen. It can't happen. You can't effectively decide a game and probably change this entire series. Cleveland earned this game over and over again and the refs kept taking it away. This is inexcusable and an absolutely cheating of the Cleveland Cavaliers and NBA fans in general. Fucking atrocious.
-
1
-
-
Rule change idea. Hitting a shooter's hand after release should not be a foul because it has no effect whatsoever on the shot
-
I mean if they play defense anything is possible, but they don't like playing defense. They actually should have a better shot in game 1 with Love being out because they're a better defensive lineup without him, but he's also their best 3 point shooter if Korver isn't lighting it up.
-
How do you all feel about the proposition of not naming or showing pictures of school shooters? So long as they are either dead or in custody, I think their names and faces should never been seen on a TV screen. Fuck em. Let them die or rot in prison anonymous.
-
1
-
-
I entirely disagree with that 98% of the people in the country figure.
What does this even mean, Bware?
It means that the vast majority of mass shooters had no present father figure.
Obviously part of that issue is unfit men. Part of it is also the devolution of our society and the way it views traditional family values.
Quite frankly, the world would be a much better place if young people fucked people they actually like. Then there'd be more two parent households.
-
If there's a best solution to this problem it's going to involve acknowledging realities on both sides of the political spectrum. The right will have to acknowledge that ease of access to firearms is a problem and that we can present legislation that doesn't affect 2A rights. The left will have to acknowledge that young men in particular benefit greatly from a 2 parent household with a male role model in place and that their attempts to tear apart traditional family values are abhorrent.
-
He's already in the discussion and arguably better.
-
Kevin Durant ruined basketball. This is pointless.
-
I think their reaction to leftist sjw authoritarianism is wrong though. I agree there needs to be a resistance to that but these guys, especially Harris, do nothing but spout out anger and/or state propaganda. The reaction to radical authoritarian leftism shouldn't be radical neo-conservatism disguised as reason by articulate guys. It should be reasonable.
If someone identifys as a pineapple it's my choice to either be an asshole (so long as I'm not infringing on their rights) or to just live and let live and move the fuck on. I think most people feel this way but it's asshole sjw's and people like Pederson and Shapiro who are minorities that have been given undue platforms that falsely frame the debate and public discourse on a great many issues.
This is of course done on purpose to manipulate people and get them to make political decisions based on emotion and more importantly on things that don't effect our owners bottom line.
I don't see Shapiro as angry at all, though I would say that I disagree with him much more often than Peterson. Peterson has an aggression to him, but it seems to only show itself when he's being interviewed and they take something he said completely out of context or completely reword it into something worse. For instance, with the Vice interview, the SJW headline said "Peterson says women shouldn't wear makeup and heels to work" when what really happened is they were discussing sexual signaling in the workplace and he added those two to the list of forms of sexual signaling. Peterson is misrepresented more than any public figure in recent times.
Also, he has said he'd use special pronouns if asked by a student, but that he wouldn't use them otherwise in order to adhere to C-16.
I also disagree on what they say being propaganda. They both cite sources regularly and seeing as Peterson is an actual scientist and clinical psychologist, I happen to value his stance more so than that of fruitcake gender studies idiots who don't have any actual science backing their positions.
-
1
-
-
Idk man, I like Joe Rogan but he's kind of just a guy to me. To me when I hear the word thinker something much different comes to mind.
Joe Rogan is definitely a smart guy and I think he gives everyone a chance to speak their peace and he doesn't just dismiss shit but he's just a regular dude.
As for the other guys you listed, I can't get with you on that. Those guys are dickheads who are only relavent so long as they can react to the dumb authoritarian social justice warriors. Sam Harris in particular is just laughable when it comes to foreign policy.
Are they dickheads, though? The greatest thinkers throughout history upset people. What are they going to be years from now if we can somehow avoid this descent into leftist fascism? They are standing in the way of the application of intellectual eugenics. We need to be standing behind these people.
-
David Hogg gets hate because he's a 18 year old kid who can't articulate himself like a fully developed adult, which shouldn't be surprising because he's an 18 year old kid. An 18 year old kid who was 17 when he survived a mass shooting and subsequently became an activist. He shouldn't receive so much hate for his inability to articulate himself considering these things.
But then you have a student activist in Kyle Kashuv who is younger than Hogg and much, much more eloquent and very clearly more intelligent, so you have that constant comparison if you pay attention to each of their stances. There's a reason Hogg won't debate Kashuv...he'd get annihilated by a smarter, more eloquent young man.
-
Joe Rogan might be the most important North American thinker right now, and that's not ignoring more intelligent folks like Peterson, Shapiro, Sam Harris, etc. It's that Joe can present even unpopular opinions without being an asshole and can reach both sides of the aisle.
-
If feels so wrong whenever there isn't a cold weather team is the SCF
-
I'd gladly pay a percentage of my taxes for providing armed security personnel for public schools. I think we all would
-
lol at deleting my 4 intelligent posts. You are simply children who cant confront real issues.
prove me wrong.......
because you believe media, isnt proof.
I am currently more intelligent then you will ever be. I certainly know the difference between a fact and a belief better then you do.
An extreme unlikelihood is no more likely simply because it can't be proven wrong without drastic action. I'm not a medical professional who can take you to the morgue in Santa Fe.
As for deleting your posts, I can and will. So long as they are disrespectful of the dead and their loved ones and so long as they offer nothing whatsoever to the conversation.
Go find a new bridge.
-
The whole coddling thing is dead on accurate.
-
The idea of putting a block on legislation for 2 weeks after a mass shooting is the GOP party line anytime anyone brings up any sort of gun control. The sad fact of the matter is that this is simply impossible to do because there are too many mass shootings. (That's besides the fact that two weeks is hardly enough time for people not to use emotional responses.)
It's another idea that sounds good on paper but is simply impossible to carry out in the real world.
The "we dont ban cars after DUIs" is another GOP party line and another idea that is a false equivalency and a strawman to boot. No one is saying we should ban guns, but having someone required to prove they can operate a gun, have a license to carry one, etc., exactly as we do with cars, is a great idea. Not to mention we have updated cars safety protocols over and over again over the years so that there are a great deal less fatalities when we have a car accident.
My idea is let's try what has worked well in other countries. I know Fox News and the Trump administration would tell you otherwise, but the facts are that gun control works and works well in many other countries. To put this into some concrete points:
First, to use Ngata's statement about cars, let's have anyone who wants to own a gun have to take a course on gun safety- including ways to keep minors from getting their hands on them- and have to pass a test on gun safety at the end of the course. We could also use this course to give a basic evaluation of the customer's mental health in some manner, so that at least we don't let a complete crazy buy a gun. In addition, let's say every five years you need to retake some sort of test in order to continue to be allowed the license to carry a gun.
Second, let's also enforce laws we already have on the books and make new ones as necessary to keep semi-automatic rifles and especially automatic rifles from the hands of any citizen. You do not need these to hunt. If you wish to own one, perhaps we could have another license for that as well as a stricter test, and maybe you are required to keep that gun at the shooting range. Or possibly the ammunition for it at the shooting range. Along with this idea, gun dealers that sell guns to people without doing a background check or without checking for gun licenses should be fined. If they continue to ignore the new laws on this, their business should eventually be shut down.
Third, and least likely to happen, let's get the NRA out of politics. The NRA has become a bully, throwing its political weight around to try to get discounts from everything from Delta Airlines to Yeti coolers. They have several politicians on their payroll. They have completely and utterly abandoned the principles of responsible gun ownership to blaming everything else for shootings- up to and including the amount of doors in a school, was their latest excuse- to simply owning guns for the sake of owning guns.
There is a lot to be said about what has or hasn't worked in other countries. I'm not at all opposed to legislation if it's in any way reasonable.
-
I'm with SteVo on this particular individual in Texas. How fucking pathetic do you have to be emotionally to get this point? I mean, there were other clues that he was fucking weird, like wearing a trench coat every single day.
In Texas.
Like a girl was going to want to go out with the stinky, weird creep .What did he reasonably expect in the first place?
These young men that commit mass violence over girls/women were awkward and dejected long before they became violent, and quite honestly, schools tend to ignore these individuals as opposed to seeking them out and helping them learn how to communicate. The kid is responsible for the act, but if we don't acknowledge our own failures as a society that result in these kinds of individuals developing in the first place, we'll never come to a solution. -
Perhaps the most sickening part of America's school shooting problem, after of course the deaths of children and faculty, is the level of politicization we're seeing on a day by day basis. Dead children are now a platform upon which to wag fingers and self-promote. It's utterly sickening.
What this topic boils down to is this: what does each of us think is the actual solution to this problem? Better yet, can we collectively agree on a solution?
My take: a balance of every idea except arming teachers, which is utterly stupid.
Legislation: there has to be some middle ground we can find on legislation, because legislation has worked in other countries. We of course don't want emotionally based legislation, but we can still approach the drafting of such legislation with logic and deductive reason.
Armed Security Personal at schools: this is a no brainer to me. At most other mass gatherings of people in the United States, armed security is present. Why should schools be any different, especially considering it's mostly children involved?
Recentering our moral compass and our priorities: we have to be better as a collective unit overall or we have no chance at fixing this issue.
-
How about that no goal call in the Pittsburgh game earlier? How can a clear shot of the puck behind the line AND the post not be definitive evidence that it's a goal?
-
That's the pattern, but what exactly could he be doing that causes that? I don't watch his teams and see them doing anything differently from any other hockey team. It's just coincidence.
Civil Discourse: Ideology/Identity and Why so Many People have Conflated the Two
in Politics, Religion & Science
Posted
It's no secret that identity politics are ravaging relations between people in the United States. Of course the media presents it as tension between races, though I'm not convinced that's the truth. I think the tension is mostly along political lines. So what's the primary issue that's causing all of this? Very clearly, people have conflated their own individual identities (as well as any group identity of which they belong to) with their preferred ideologies. No longer can the average American gather with friends, sit around the dinner table on Saturday night, and discuss recent events and politics without someone getting all huffy puffy and charging out of the house like a petulant child, speeding away in their car, and ending perfectly good friendships over political disagreements. How silly is that?
What do all of you think about this current climate?
How do you feel we should address this issue?
Do you think that this climate sabotages the development of critical thinking skills for developing young people?
Final question: Hypothetically you are a parent. In this climate moving forward, how we teach our children to not believe everything they read, not to rush to align with specific groups, and to come to their own conclusions about political issues. How would you go about this, hypothetically, as a parent?